|
costaexpress wrote: I know there is a risk of reigniting old arguments, however, just wondered if there is a generally preferred option now being put forward by the majority of MA contributors, is it do nothing and encourage traffic to avoid the area using public transport, is it to put the problem in someone else back yard and build the road elsewhere or is it for a longer tunnel, trying to form a view as to where I stand on this as there are so many lobby groups out there with hidden or competing agenda's its difficult to know what's best, certainly would like to see the whole of the Stonehenge landscape united but not at the expense of the water table being drained and the land shifting and moving and undiscovered sites being decimated.
Thank you for this thoughtful post. I made a comment about climate change in a previous post and then deleted it because it may have come across as me lecturing people for using their cars (I don't have one but am happy to get a lift from a friend who does). There is a growing view, which I share, that the A303 is part of the Stonehenge story. Yes, I know it is also a bottleneck for traffic at certain times. The stark reality is that car/vehicle use will have to be reduced over the coming decades - I don't know how that will work for HGV lorries and transporting food etc. around - will they all run on electric. Hard to imagine - it's not just about preserving the Stonehenge landscape anymore, it's about the whole environment so building long tunnels to keep more and more traffic flowing faster seems unwise. But I don't have any answers either x
|
